Citation Nr: 21009263 Decision Date: 02/22/21 Archive Date: 02/22/21 DOCKET NO. 16-58 506A DATE: February 22, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from December 1973 to November 1976. The matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeal (Board) from a September 2013 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Previously the claim was before the Board in a July 2019 Board decision. A July 2020 order of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) implemented a July 2020 Joint Motion for Remand (JMR), vacating and remanding the July 2019 Board decision that denied entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability. As such this issue of entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability is again before the Board. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability. The Veteran contends that service connection is warranted for bilateral hearing loss. In light of the points raised by the parties in the JMR and a Board review of the claims file a remand is warranted for additional development. The July 2020 JMR raised the issue that the Board erred by providing an inadequate statement of reasons or bases. Specifically, the JMR contends that the prior VA examinations failed to fully consider the Veteran’s arguments that his current hearing loss disability is causally related to service, in particular his July 2019 arguments. In July 2019 the Veteran and his representative contended that the mere absence of evidence of a hearing loss disability and/or tinnitus during service or manifestations of such is not fatal to a service connection claim. The Veteran contends that a finding that his hearing was normal at discharge failed to serve as an adequate rationale to support a conclusion that his current hearing loss is not related to service. The Veteran has highlighted submitted medical literature suggesting delayed and progressive hearing damage after acoustic trauma and his in-service hazardous noise exposure working as an artilleryman. The Board notes that a VA examination in August 2013 and August 2016 opinion failed to fully consider the Veteran’s lay statements and contentions regarding his hearing loss. As such the Board finds that a remand is warranted for a VA examination to fully address direct and presumptive service connection and the entirety of the Veteran’s lay statements regarding his hearing loss, to include delayed onset of hearing loss after acoustic trauma. As such a remand is warranted for a VA examination. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriate clinician regarding the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss disability and whether: (a.) Is it at least as likely as not (a 50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss is caused by an in-service injury, event or disease, including in-service noise exposure? (b.) Is it at least as likely as not (a 50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss (1) began during active service, (2) manifested within the applicable presumptive period after discharge from service, or (3) was noted during service with continuity of the same symptomology since service? Review of the entire claims file is required. The examiner must provide a complete rationale for all findings and opinions, and a discussion of the facts and medical principles involved would be of considerable assistance to the Board. Attention is invited to the Veteran and his representative’s statements in July 2019 contending that the mere absence of evidence of a hearing loss disability and/or tinnitus during service or manifestations of such is not fatal to a service connection claim. The Veteran contends that a finding that his hearing was normal at discharge failed to serve as an adequate rationale to support a conclusion that his current hearing loss is not related to service. Specifically, the examiner is asked to explicitly address medical literature submitted by the Veteran including Acceleration of Age-Related hearing Loss by Early Noise Exposure: Evidence of a Misspent Youth, The Journal of Neuroscience, 26(7):21115-2123 (2006); and Adding Insult to Injury: Cochlear Nerve Degeneration after “Temporary” Noise-Induced Hearing Loss, The Journal of Neuroscience, 29(45); 14077-14085 (2009). The examiner must reconcile any findings with such medical article. Additionally, the examiner must show consideration of the Veteran’s lay statements and assertions regarding the type and quality of the Veteran’s inservice noise exposure. Zi-Heng Zhu Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board K.R. Kardian, Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.